Author
Topic: How many of you would.... (Read 14732 times)

smirkypants

I couldn't live with the messy bokeh that APS-C cameras give. That is not the sensor but the optics - neuro has explained this many times.

The bokehs on a 7D with a 300/2.8, 400/2.8 or 500/4 are anything but messy. The photos are practically as lush and gorgeous in the real world. They aren't as quite as good as the 1D4, but it's really quite unfair to say they are uniformly messy. Besides, my biggest problem with bokeh isn't from the lens or the sensor, it's from the shimmer from the heat, humidity and the harsh light that you get at 100+ yards. Even if you're shooting full frame with a 400/2.8, environmental conditions often kill good bokeh at that distance.

BaconBets

1. The 7D already has 8fps2. The 7D already expands to 12800 ISO3. The 7D's major draw: The 1.6x crop factor4. The 7D's next major draw: 18 MP

Whoa....slow down!!! It may be possible to expand the 7d to ISO 12800, but please, please, please do not try to equate the 7d at 12800 to the 1d4 APS-H at 12800. The 1d4 sensor has 12800 as a regular ISO setting and is expandable to 102K. The 1d4 image quality will blow the doors off the 7d at 12800.(and 6400, 3200, 1600, etc)

When I posed the question, it was really because Canon simply does not offer a regular form factor DSLR body that has high image quality and good handling (decent AF, fps, etc.). Many of us would like a camera with high end imaging and well rounded handling that is not the size of a steering wheel. I personally don't need 12fps and sports illustrated AF, but I don't want a camera that has been knee-capped.

Logged

BaconBets

I would be very interested to get one, although for me I suspect the 1DX will be more than I can handle so I should be content with it for a whie! What I like about your suggestion though is the use the APS-H sensor instead of the APS-C. I like this idea for a 7D replacement or a new 1 series model. Probably an expensive solution for Canon though to keep this sensor around, but very interesting indeed!

I don't see why it would be expensive for Canon, as there would be no new R&D and it is already in production. I would think there would actually be a huge cost savings for them to recycle an existing product that there would still be heavy consumer demand for.

How many of you would...Pay $2995 for a 1d4 aps-h sensor in a 7d body?

Certainly not me. I wouldn't pay $1,600 for an APS-H sensor in a 7D body.

APS-H is dead...dead...dead. (Except possibly for some very limited niche uses, such as security cameras). Canon's executives have said as much in interviews. Canon never made lenses for the APS-H sensor. The difference in image quality is marginal at best and shrinking. I'd much rather have real improvements to the 7D than recycling a sensor that makes my APS-C lenses worthless.

Besides, why would anyone pay nearly $1,000 more for a 1.3 crop sensor than the 5D II is currently selling for? If I wanted to go to a larger sensor, I'd just buy a 5D II.

I would be very interested to get one, although for me I suspect the 1DX will be more than I can handle so I should be content with it for a whie! What I like about your suggestion though is the use the APS-H sensor instead of the APS-C. I like this idea for a 7D replacement or a new 1 series model. Probably an expensive solution for Canon though to keep this sensor around, but very interesting indeed!

I don't see why it would be expensive for Canon, as there would be no new R&D and it is already in production. I would think there would actually be a huge cost savings for them to recycle an existing product that there would still be heavy consumer demand for.

Maybe in terms of short terms development cost, but I was thinking that production wise they would now have to carry another skew (sensor type) in addition to their APS-C and FF. This would also mean we would get the existing APS-H sensor as is with no improvement if they were to do it and add no R&D cost. So I was more thinking in term of production, and future development cost. I could be totally of base here.

It is sad that after spending the money on this sensor they would drop it completely.

Yep, that looks fairly noisy, and judging by the exposure settings, was shot in a reasonable amount of light (presumably as a test?), which also helps. Looks like a fair bit of NR, too...perhaps with ACR, but even if not, reducing it to 20% of original size provides substantial NR.

The 1D IV would look that "good" at ISO 25600.

Quote

Canon simply does not offer a regular form factor DSLR body that has high image quality and good handling (decent AF, fps, etc.)

Oh, please - what a bloody stupid thing to say.[/quote]

No, it's not, but your comment is a bloody rude thing to say, IMO. Perhaps you just have a different (i.e. lower) definition of 'high image quality'.

No, I wouldn't. But, I would pay $4299 for an APS-C sensor in a 1D X body (with some noise improvements, 1D X-like AF but with an f/8 center point, 1D X metering and ergonomics).

Anyone else?

Why would you prefer an APS-C over the APS-H? Is it because it would givce you a longer reach with your lenses? I though the APS-H sensor was better then the APS-C sensor?

In anycase I would be a buyer for any crop type sensor new camera with pro-level body and AF, to complement the 1DX. Not sure if I would prefer the 1 series form factor or something smaller to make it easier to carry around...

Why would you prefer an APS-C over the APS-H? Is it because it would givce you a longer reach with your lenses? I though the APS-H sensor was better then the APS-C sensor?

Yes, for the longer reach (apparent reach, that is, meaning more pixels on target when focal length is limiting). While it's true that the APS-H sensor delivers better IQ and less noise, if you have to crop the 1.3x image to the FoV of the 1.6x, the IQ is no better (worse if you have to crop even more, i.e. if the 1.6x image had to be cropped), and the resulting image would be much lower resolution, too.

Yes, for the longer reach (apparent reach, that is, meaning more pixels on target when focal length is limiting). While it's true that the APS-H sensor delivers better IQ and less noise, if you have to crop the 1.3x image to the FoV of the 1.6x, the IQ is no better (worse if you have to crop even more, i.e. if the 1.6x image had to be cropped), and the resulting image would be much lower resolution, too.

Make sense. Your config would also provide better differentiation with the FF of the 1DX in the sense that if you already have a FF (1DX or other), getting a 1.6x crop sensor gives you a better delta then a 1.3x crop factor. I guess I forgot about this when I wrote my initial question...

Am sure the next 12 months will be very interesting when Canon unfold its full line-up...

No, I wouldn't. But, I would pay $4299 for an APS-C sensor in a 1D X body (with some noise improvements, 1D X-like AF but with an f/8 center point, 1D X metering and ergonomics).

Anyone else?

Neuro, I can't dispute that if an APS-C were released with 1d/5d level performance, there would certainly be interest in it. But right now that is a hypothetical sensor that would require new R&D and lead time. The 1d4 sensor is real and ready to go...and until the 1dx is released, is still Canon's best for events, sports and movies

If Nikon were to recycle their 12mp d3s sensor into the 700s with movie functionality in 2012, Canon would have their hands full.